Description

Moist most of the time. Start off the ledge to the left climb to a very "hard to clip" bolt. Fun climbing with powerful reaches and sharp crimpers/pockets. A surprising slab crux brings you to a "runout" for the bluff. Aside from the general wetness it's a really fun route and should get more traffic. Probably one of the better 12's at the bluff. Just left of "Quiet Desperation."

No bolt needs to be added to this route. Respect the first ascentionist and every ascentionist thereafter. If you can climb the crux on this route (and everything up to it), then you can easily clip the last bolt from jugs. There aren't any tenuous moves between the second to last, and last bolts. There's no reason that a person would deck from this route unless they are doing something stupid.

Darin, the description isn't the place to be injecting your personal opinion on ethics and bolting. If you want to comment about those things put them in the comment section. As Jonathan pointed out, you need to respect the first ascentionist and every ascentionist thereafter. Don't bring the climb down to your level.

I'm going to have to back up Darin on this one. While I don't agree with him, he's perfectly entitled to share his opinion about the bolting in the route description. As far as the fairly serious allegation that he "brought the route down to his level", it's not like he went out and added a bolt.

I support Darins right to an opinion on the climb. Regardless of my feelings on whether it is right or wrong to add a bolt, I do feel strongly that the route description is no place for such a comment. The route description is a place for just that, a description of said route, not for a discussion of personal beliefs on bolting ethics. For instance, what if I want to write a rebuttal route description and say that the bolting is stellar, can I do so? No, because the route description is already taken, therefore not making it a suitable outlet for discussion. By posting those comments in the comment section it gives us all an opportunity to respond on equal terms.When it is in the route description, we must accept that the opinion of that writer will have more clout than subsequent comments.

I don't think there were any "fairly serious allegations" thrown at Darin. I am putting "Dont bring the climb down to your level" out there as a comment to anybody thinking of rebolting that line. The first ascentionist and all subsequent ascentionist have done the climb how it is, that is how it should be left. Altering it because you are uncomfortable with the bolting brings it down to your level.

And, really, adding another bolt would hardly make the climb more safe, as that section is piss easy climbing (5.8??) on huge, solid buckets and features. If you fall there, you probably shouldn't have been on the route in the first place. Sorry if I sound snobby, but it's the truth!

I agree with Randy and Jonathan there is no need for another bolt the end of the climb is cake you can no hands rest at the bucket jug if you need to then do a few moves on jugs to the next bolt after the crux. I couldn't see a scenario where someone was able to complete the crux then fall at the enormous jugs. I also agree with Anthony that a Subjective opinion like that should be in the comments section and not part of the OBJECTIVE route description. I think this route is one of my favorite routes at the wing and deserves more traffic but because of all the opinions about the possibility of decking people don't even bother trying it which is sad.